Lines Matching defs:list
44 * s_roots bl list spinlock protects:
45 * - the s_roots list (see __d_drop)
407 * LRU list _and_ the DCACHE_SHRINK_LIST use.
410 * on the shrink list (ie not on the superblock LRU list).
416 * when deleted from or added to the per-superblock LRU list, not
417 * from/to the shrink list. That is to avoid an unneeded dec/inc
418 * pair when moving from LRU to shrink list in select_collect().
452 static void d_shrink_add(struct dentry *dentry, struct list_head *list)
455 list_add(&dentry->d_lru, list);
462 * callback for freeing the LRU list. "isolate" removes it from the
464 * private list.
477 struct list_head *list)
483 list_lru_isolate_move(lru, &dentry->d_lru, list);
552 * Cursors can move around the list of children. While we'd been
553 * a normal list member, it didn't matter - ->d_child.next would've
814 * the LRU list.
874 * list: we'd much rather just get rid of them immediately.
919 static void __dput_to_list(struct dentry *dentry, struct list_head *list)
923 /* let the owner of the list it's on deal with it */
929 d_shrink_add(dentry, list);
933 void dput_to_list(struct dentry *dentry, struct list_head *list)
942 __dput_to_list(dentry, list);
1127 * Lock a dentry from shrink list.
1134 * the caller to kick it off-list. Otherwise, return true and have
1178 void shrink_dentry_list(struct list_head *list)
1180 while (!list_empty(list)) {
1183 dentry = list_entry(list->prev, struct dentry, d_lru);
1201 __dput_to_list(parent, list);
1237 * The list move itself will be made by the common LRU code. At
1239 * lru lock. This is safe to do, since every list movement is
1252 * properly isolated from the main list. It is thus, always a
1531 * Search the dentry child list of the specified parent,
1533 * list for prune_dcache(). We descend to the next level
1534 * whenever the d_subdirs list is non-empty and continue
1539 * the end of the unused list. This may not be the total
2003 * Decrement negative dentry count if it was in the LRU list.
2365 * The hash list is protected using RCU.
2370 * It is possible that concurrent renames can mess up our list
2469 * The hash list is protected using RCU.
2474 * It is possible that concurrent renames can mess up our list